With Al-Qaeda’s last major foothold in Syria now under threat, the US has suddenly become deeply concerned about civilians that could be caught in the crossfire – even as the US military loosens its own rules of engagement.

Read more

Citing humanitarian concerns, Washington has now signaled that even a conventional attack on Idlib, branded by Moscow “a terrorist nest,” could result in military action from the US and its allies. The Syrian military is reportedly preparing to launch an offense to liberate the northwestern province from the jihadists.

Idlib, it seems, is different: The US military has always found a way to justify its anti-terrorism operations – even in urban areas. In fact, as Nicolas J. S. Davies, author of ‘Blood On Our Hands: The American Invasion and Destruction of Iraq’, told RT, the US military continues to loosen its rules of engagement so that its bombing campaigns don’t run into any red tape.

“The Obama administration had already loosened rules of engagement in the war against Islamic State in Syria and Iraq to permit more killing of civilians in the bombing campaign the US conducted,” Davies said.

“They expended over 100,000 bombs and missiles to destroy cities like Raqqa and Mosul. President Trump has reportedly loosened rules of engagement further.”

RT’s Igor Zhdanov looks into how the US approach in fighting terrorists differs depending on the region – or the motive.